Lanefield vs Lower Mount Walker
In both, the large majority of households own their home and the large majority of homes are detached houses. In Lanefield, about half of households are couple families. On these figures, Lanefield tends to suit people living alone and couples.
Which one suits you?
There is no overall winner — the suburb that suits a family with school-age kids is routinely the wrong one for someone commuting into the city. So each of these answers its own question, against a checklist you can see, using the same figures in the tables below.
Families with school-age kids
They split
one each way, out of the 6 things we measure here
- Lanefield is already more of a family suburb (61% vs 49%)
- Lower Mount Walker carries lower crime risk (14/100 vs 62/100)
Weighs schools, house stock, crime, parks, childcare, and who already lives there.
First-home buyers
Lower Mount Walker
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- leaves households under less mortgage stress (20% vs 28%)
Weighs mortgage stress.
Renters
Lower Mount Walker
ahead on 2 of the 3 things we measure here
- leaves renters under less rental stress (11% vs 20%)
- has cheaper rent ($210/wk vs $263/wk)
Weighs rent, rental stress, and how much is for rent.
Commuting to the city
Lanefield
ahead on 2 of the 3 things we measure here
- has a shorter drive in (58 min vs 63 min)
- sits closer to the CBD (65.8 km vs 70.3 km)
Weighs distance, drive time, and walkability.
Downsizers and retirees
Lower Mount Walker
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- carries lower crime risk (14/100 vs 62/100)
Weighs who already lives there, GPs, walkability, and crime.
Investors
Lower Mount Walker
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- is growing faster (3.8% vs -9.3%)
Weighs population growth.
Where they sit
Lanefield and Lower Mount Walker drawn to the same scale. Both outlines are shown together, so the map answers whether they share a border and how their areas compare.
Bars start at zero. Scores, risks and rankings are drawn against their full 0–100 range; other rows are drawn in proportion to the larger of the two.
Side by side, out of 100
Risks are inverted — shown as safety and low exposure — so a longer bar always means better.
Demographics
Lower Mount Walker has more residents (192 vs 97); Lower Mount Walker has higher household incomes ($99,632 vs $68,224).
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 97 | 192 +98% vs other |
| Population trend (2016 → 2021) | -9.3% | +3.8% |
| Median age | 53 | 51 |
| Median household income | $68,224/yr | $99,632/yr +46% vs other |
| Median weekly rent | $263/wk +20% vs other | $210/wk |
Age profile
Share of residents in each band, 2021 Census.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (25.8%).
Where residents were born
Largest overseas birthplaces, as a share of all residents, 2021 Census. A dash means that country is not among the suburb's own eight largest.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (5.2%).
Who lives together
Household composition, 2021 Census.
What people live in
Occupied private dwellings by structure, 2021 Census.
Qualifications
Highest non-school qualification, residents 15+, 2021 Census.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (17.5%).
Who owns and who rents
Occupied private dwellings by tenure, 2021 Census.
Development activity
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| New dwellings approved | 3,476 across Ipswich | 524 across Scenic Rim |
| Approvals change year on year | -7% | +65% |
Ranking within QLD
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| House price | — same for both | |
| Income | Higher than 35% of QLD | Higher than 74% of QLD |
| Schools | — same for both | |
| Walkability | Higher than 69% of QLD | Higher than 37% of QLD |
| Affordability | — same for both | |
| EV adoption | Higher than 62% of QLD same for both | |
| NBN connectivity | Higher than 60% of QLD | Higher than 58% of QLD |
Liveability
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | — same for both | |
| Score | — same for both | |
| Socio-economic band | below-average income decile 3/10 | mid-range socio-economic decile 6/10 |
Risk profile
Lanefield carries more crime risk (62 vs 14).
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Bushfire | None 0/100 same for both | |
| Crime | Moderate 62/100 | Low 14/100 |
| Flood | Not mapped no mapped data here same for both | |
| Coastal erosion | None 0/100 same for both | |
| Aircraft noise | None 0/100 same for both | |
| Industrial facilities nearby | 1 within 5 km | 0 within 5 km |
Schools
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Inside the suburb | 0 same for both | |
| Rated above peers | 0 same for both | |
| Rated at peers | 0 same for both | |
| Rated below peers | 0 same for both | |
Amenities in the suburb
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Waterways | 1 | 2 |
Mobility
Lower Mount Walker sits further from the CBD (70.3 km vs 65.8 km).
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Walkability score | 6/100 | 0/100 |
| Distance to Brisbane | 65.8 km | 70.3 km +7% vs other |
| Drive time (normal traffic) | 58 min | 63 min |
| Electric vehicle share | 0.4% postcode 4340 same for both | |
| Rooftop solar per 100 dwellings | 82 postcode 4340 same for both | |
How people get to work
Method of travel on census day 2021 — which fell during COVID restrictions, so working from home is inflated and every travel mode understated.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (71.1%).
Setting
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Elevation | 49 m above sea level, at the suburb centre | 56 m above sea level, at the suburb centre |
NBN connectivity
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Connectivity score | 30/100 same for both | |
| Most common technology | Fixed wireless same for both | |
| Full-fibre (FTTP) share | 0% 40 premises | 0% 67 premises |
Climate
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual rainfall | 897 mm same for both | |
| Summer max (Jan) | 31.3°C same for both | |
| Winter min (Jul) | 6.1°C same for both | |
Air quality (annual mean)
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| PM2.5 | 5.0 µg/m³ same for both | |
| PM10 | 17.9 µg/m³ same for both | |
| NO₂ | 0.27 pphm same for both | |
Council rates
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Average residential rate | $1,713/yr | $1,689/yr |
| Council | Ipswich | Scenic Rim |
Federal electorate
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Division | Blair | Wright |
| Member | Shayne Neumann | Scott Buchholz |
| Party | Australian Labor Party | Liberal National Party of Queensland |
First Home Owner Grant
| Lanefield | Lower Mount Walker | |
|---|---|---|
| Grant amount | $30,000 same for both | |
| Property price cap | $750,000 same for both | |
| Eligibility | New same for both | |
Tags
More comparisons
Other comparisons with Lanefield
Information shown is provided as-is from Australian government and commercial data sources.
Always verify with the relevant authority before making property decisions.
See Data Sources and How We Calculate for details.